Switzerland's Copyright Law To Stay In Neutral, Surprising Anti-Piracy Groups

Based on a new report on the impact of unauthorized downloads, Switzerland seems to be saying “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The study, released by the Federal Department of Justice and Police, has concluded that piracy doesn’t have a negative economic impact on the nation and contends that the current legislation, which allows for copyrighted material to be downloaded for personal use, is sufficient. Chris Marcich, president of the Motion Picture Association, Europe, tells me it’s a “surprising and disappointing result.” In its investigation (in part based on a year-old Dutch study because the markets are similar), a federal council found that up to one-third of Swiss over the age of 15 download movies, music and games for free and that the majority do not distinguish between downloads that are legal and those that are not. Most compelling for the authors of the study, however, appears to be that users of file-sharing sites are still spending money on entertainment and the savings they realize by downloading free content is in turn being spent on movie tickets and games.

While the council believes that it is especially the “big foreign production companies who suffer” from — and will have to adapt to — new consumer habits, it doesn’t believe these downloads will have a negative impact on Switzerland’s own cultural output. Marcich says, “It’s troubling for them to apparently base their conclusion on that sort of reasoning. The phenomenon affects all countries.” Local film and music producer Adriano Vigano is also an attorney for the country’s anti-piracy association and tells me: “The Swiss government says it’s not so worried about piracy because it only affects foreign rightsholders. That’s an aggressive statement.” Especially, he notes, since foreign films have about 95% market share in Switzerland. Anti-piracy groups, politicians and artists are mobilizing to get the government to collect more data, says Vigano.

7 Comments

Consumer • on Dec 5, 2011 4:09 pm

Those conclusions are reasonable. I hate when my blueray makes me sit through 20 minutes of previews just to get to the film at home, when I used to be able to fast-forward the cassette. Things like that, penalties for the paying consumer, are an example of justifications pirates use. Nonetheless, pirates purchase movie tickets and help fund the studios in significant ways. In short, until the film industry decides to focus on providing entertainment, instead of finding ways to abuse legal relationships it has, it will consistently have to contend with pirates.

Bluerays are much easier to buy, and they have better quality. Hulu and Netflix streaming would be convenient, if they weren’t forced to handle such a limited library. Facebook and iTunes represent advances, and probably mean that the “piracy” problem is shrinking as we speak.

Of course, there will always be thieves, but that outlier population does not justify the extreme measures that MPAA lobbies for to make the entertainment market a place for unfair competition.

Big Tech’s enabling of pirates must stop. So sick of their stupid propaganda online. Like this BS “Consumer” who seemingly has a lecture for people who work hard to create content and would rather that it isn’t robbed online.

Read above: Majority of a Generation does not distinguish between Stolen Property and Bought Goods. It’s disastrous long-term.

The MPAA must win this battle, and do so ASAP.

Duh • on Dec 5, 2011 4:09 pm

Star Jonestown, what are you drinking buddy?!

“Piracy hurts indies the most.” — are you bloody kidding? Every Indy film-maker I know doesn’t have the time, money, or resources to go after copyright infringing sites. MPAA is battling for the Big 6, not some hundred-thousand dollar budget Indy-flick.

If anything, the small-time would <3 being pirated because it means buzz, interest and possibly a distribution deal. People, in general, aren't interested in downloading some indy, they want the latest blockbuster.

MPAA protects the big studios who are least hurt by downloads from people who were never going to buy it at their markup. MPAA doesn’t want their product to become a commodity like iTunes forced music to become. Now unprotected music (thanks Mr. Jobs) can be purchased from iTunes for 99 cents. Record Industry lost their markup, MPAA is terrified of that day…

Piracy sucks. So does exaggeration. Almost as much as being a big studio brown nose.

Repo Man • on Dec 5, 2011 4:09 pm

“Every Indy film-maker I know doesn’t have the time, money, or resources to go after copyright infringing sites.”

Yeah, that’s because we’re too busy trying to make the film and get it SOLD. Like, for MONEY, asshole.

“the small-time would <3 being pirated because it means buzz, interest and possibly a distribution deal."

Spoken like a true thief who doesn't actually create anything. And what good is a distribution deal if fuckers like YOU steal the film?

"People, in general, aren't interested in downloading some indy, they want the latest blockbuster."

actually, piracy would hurt big $$ productions more than indies, since indies cost exponentially less to produce, and aren’t made with the intention of big profits. Piracy will always exist, whether it was recording on VHS, or copying it digitally.

casting couch • on Dec 5, 2011 4:09 pm

Switzerland at least has some shred of democracy and sense. Corporate America wants to own the thoughts in your head.

Just Saying • on Dec 5, 2011 4:09 pm

Switzerland’s attitude of “not our problem” is consistent with its other policies. Switzerland is best known for banks, watches and knives, NOT music or film. In contrast, a country like Sweden has always appreciated and originated great music and film.